Analysis of the Typology of a Crime - Essay Example

Analysis of the Typology of a Crime Sam is a Thirty-one-year old male serving 5 years for arson with intent after setting fire to a doctor’s car. The offence took place on Christmas Eve. The offender had discovered that evening that his wife, who had complications after giving birth to their child, had to remain in the mother and baby unit over Christmas. This made him angry, as he had never spent Christmas on his own before. In particular he was very angry towards the hospital doctor for keeping her in. He telephoned for one of his regular prostitutes but they were unavailable. This exacerbated his anger because he wanted to satisfy his sexual desires. He smoked some cannabis and had some drinks and according to him he decided to go out for some food. However he left his house armed with some petrol and a lighter. Sam then went round to the hospital, and having seen the doctor go back to his car for a file in the day time, found it parked around the back at one of the hospital buildings. Sam then doused the car in petrol, set fire to it and watched as it burned. Sam was arrested at the scene. On arrest Sam stated that watching the fire made him feel better and made his anger subside. He described himself as fascinated with fire and sees it as a powerful means of expressing his feelings. Sam started setting fires with his friends when he was a child and this included setting fires to dustbins and old furniture found on the streets. However as he got older and found he could not deal with his problems as well as other people he started to use fire to vent his anger, to gain the attention he wanted and to feel powerful. Sam had a childhood that was characterised by physical and sexual abuse, and he has been in trouble with the police before. He used alcohol and drugs to manage his emotions, but he says that this sometimes increases his risk of setting fires and so makes his problems worse. Questions 1. Several theorists have devised offender typologies according to the nature and motivation of their crimes. What are the main categories for this crime and how does this offender fit into them? 2. Why do you think the offender committed their crime? What are other reasons for this type of offence? Answer 1 The FBI (2009) defines Arson as ‘Any wilful or malicious burning or attempt to burn, with or without intent to defraud, a dwelling house, public building, motor vehicle, or aircraft, personal property of another, or the like’. This definition includes a number of conditions under which a person may be said to have committed arson, as of which centre around that person’s choice to try and destroy some object by setting it on fire. Arson is a serious crime that puts property and life at risk. The United States alone suffers an average loss of $17,000 per year due to such fire-setting (Seigel, 2012). Arson has been historically used as a weapon in political and civil movements, but it is just as often caused by individuals or groups of individuals who hope to accomplish a personal agenda. Criminal cases of arson usually refer to the latter type and over the years a number of typologies have been developed to explain why people commit arson. The last fifty years have seen the emergence of a number of motivational explanations for why people commit arson (Fritzon, 2012). The typologies thus developed attempt to explain the occurrence of a wide variety of factors that seem to cause a person to commit arson. Most motivational typologies have been developed based on the acts of a group that comprises of predominantly Caucasian and male individuals (Fritzon, 2012; Davis & Lauber, 1999), and thus may be considered applicable to the present vignette. A majority of these typologies are inductive in that they try to ascertain motivation from the context of the act; but a few deductive typologies emphasis the empirical relationships between personal characteristics of the fire-setter and the situation in which the act occurs. Magee (1933; in Dickens & Sugarman, 2012) provided the first inductive typologies for arsonists, dividing them into pathological and non-pathological individuals. A more complex and comprehensive typology was given by Yarnell (1951; in Dickens& Sugarman, 2012) which provided five possible explanations including unintentional, delusional, erotic, revenge and by children. Of these, the typology of revenge fits the present case, since Sam was angry with the doctor who ordered his wife to stay in the hospital. It is possible that Sam blamed the doctor for depriving him of the company he craved during the festivities by keeping his wife and new born child away from him. This caused him to want to retaliate by hurting the doctor in some way. As he already had knowledge of where the doctor parked his car, he was able to plan his revenge by setting fire to the car. Revenge features prominently in a number of different inductive typologies (Davis & Lauber, 1999), including the behavioural typology provided by Inciardi (1970; in Dickens and Sugarman, 2012) who suggested that about 58% of arson cases were associated with revenge. This typology also suggested that excitement from watching the fire was a significant motivator for fire-setting (constituting 13% of cases). Sam is known to state that he enjoyed setting fires, and felt that it made him ‘feel better and deal with his feelings’. This suggests that Sam was also motivated by the anticipation of a positive experience if he set a fire. Given the negative mood he was in before the incident, it is conceivable that he would be motivated to take action that would help him feel better. Icove and Estepp (1987; in Dickens & Sugarman, 2012) also suggest that revenge and excitement are important motivators for arsonists. Douglas et al (1996; in Dickens & Sugarman) further developed the typology provided by Icove and Estepp for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and suggested that there were six possible motivations for arson which also included revenge and excitement. Rix (1994; in Dickens & Sugarman, 2012) suggested a new typology which may be described as ‘a cry for help’. According to this typology, arson is a symptom of underlying problems like abuse, mental dysfunction or illness (Davis & Lauber, 1999). Sam is known to have experience d abuse as a child, and his fire-setting habits also developed in childhood, when setting fires helped him feel good. It is possible that his need to set things on fire arises from his inability to cope with the abuse that he sustained; so that each time he experiences frustration, anger or sadness that he cannot escape from, he turns to arson to lighten his mood. Rix also suggested that in a few cases, arson served as an antidepressant for the arsonist. Sam may also believe that arson enables him to feel better when he feels sad. Faulk (1994; in Dickens & Sugarman, 2012) suggested that fire-setters found committing arson to be instrumental (led to a valued end result like revenge of excitement) or intrinsic (inherent interest in the fire). Sam’s present case seems to fit both these typologies. Setting the doctor’s car of fire helped him gain revenge of the doctor, as well as alleviate his mood. At the same time, by his own admission, Sam is fascinated with fires, and has been so since he was a child. His behaviour also fits two of Edmund’s (1987; in Dickens & Sugarman, 2012) typologies for aggressive behaviour – the instrumental and cathartic typologies. A cathartic motivation is when arson helps the arsonist experience a release from negative emotions of frustration, anger, and such others. Sam did indeed experience catharsis when he set fires, and thus, he seems to fit this typology. It is interesting to note that researchers have tried but failed to provide mutually exclusive inductive typologies, and often admit that a particular case could fit more than one typology (Fritzon, 2012). Deductive typologies have been developed to answer this problem; and one developed by Canter and Fritzon (1998, in Fritzon, 2012) suggest that the typology of an Expressive Person and this category may fit Sam well. This typology suggests that arson allows the individual to express feeling that they are otherwise unable to cope with, and provides them with a release from negative emotions as well as a means to access positive ones. To a lesser extent he fits the typology of an ‘instrumental person’, who derives some gain from the fire, or use fire to exact revenge on another. Rice and Harris (1995; in Dickens & Sugarman, 2012) provided four deductive typologies, of which Sam’s profile best fits the Multi-fire Setters profile, which included persons who started setting fires when young, had disturbed and possibly abusive childhoods, and also had a history of trouble other than arson. Kocsis, Irwin, and Hayes (1998) have demonstrated that arson may be explained by an organised / disorganised typology. According to this explanation, Sam fits the disorganised typology, which focuses on the emotional factors associated with arson. Answer 2 A number of different reasons have been found to precede arson. Often, arsonists start setting fires when they are still children. Lowenstien (2003) suggests that Family problems, personality problems and situational factors can cause some children to take to arson as a means of asserting control over their lives. Such children often come from abusive or neglectful homes, or suffer abuse elsewhere. Siegel (2012) describes the four reasons children start fire-setting suggested by Wayne Wooden. The first is when children accidentally set a fire and experience excitement without meaning to, while the second if when they knowingly do so as a cry for help. Such children are unable to cope with some disturbance in their lives (like parental divorce, abuse or neglect) and are usually in their pre-teens. The third type includes children who are considered delinquents, and how use arson as a means to vandalising or striking back at a source of slight that they may have experienced. The final type of child who may take to arson is the disturbed child who suffers some form of mental or emotional challenge, and takes refuge in his/her fascination with fire (Siegel, 2012). A majority of arsonists seem to be men (Davis & Lauber, 1999); but this assumption may be due to documenting errors that have affected the data. Similar factors as affect children can also cause adults to start fires (Lowenstien, 2003; Fritzon, 2012). One of the hypotheses proposed to explain violent crime like arson is the frustration – aggression hypothesis suggested by Berkovitz (1989; in Day, 2005) which suggests that when people are thwarted from achieving a goal, they experience aggression towards the perceived reasons for failure. Douglas et al. (1999; in Borgeson & Kuehnle, 2010) have described six reasons for arson committed by adults. The most commonly seen reason according to these researchers was revenge for some perceived slight, followed by the need for excitement. Arsonists who craved excitement were only interested in the fire itself, and did not intend harm to others. Vandalism, profit and criminal concealment were also seen by them to be important reasons for arson to be committed. In each of these cases, there was a clear desire to harm property (though not people) for some form of gain. Vandals preferred to destroy for the sake of doing some damage, while profit focussed arsonists tried to burn property in order to gain from the event of the fire. This gain may be emotional or material. Arson committed to conceal a previously committed crime holds no interest for the arsonist except that it corrupts information about a crime (Borgeson & Kuehnle, 2010). There are a more prosaic reason for arson and have less to do with the fire and more to do with material profit (Siegel, 2012). People commit arson to make a profit, or to capitalise property that is no longer a source of profit. Such arsonists are highly organised, and are more invested in the consequences of the fire than the fire itself. In a few cases, they found that the arsonist was motivated by extremist forces that chose to use arson as a political or social tool to demonstrate their disapproval (Borgeson & Kuehnle, 2010) Pyromania has been described as a condition in which people light fires as a means of expressing their personalities. Such people deliberately set fires on multiple occasions, experience tension or some form of arousal before lighting the fire (which goes away on lighting the fire), feel relief of joy after they have lit a fire, are consumed in thoughts and emotional involvement associated with the fire, and do not do it for social or material gain (Borgeson & Kuehnle, 2010). By this definition, Sam may be a pyromaniac as he fits all but he last condition. In Sam’s particular case, a number of factors came together that encouraged him to commit arson. First of all, he had a pyromaniac disposition, and admitted to being fascinated by them since he was a child. It is possible that the abuse Sam suffered in his childhood inhibited his ability to express emotions, particularly negative ones; and fire-setting provided him with an opportunity to work though those emotions (Davis & Lauber, 1999). Abuse would also make him feel powerless, and lighting fires gave him a feeling of being in control of something, and thus, of being powerful. Thus, as an adult, he learnt to use arson as a means of processing his frustrations and anger which he does not have positive outlets for. In this particular situation, Sam suffered a frustration of him desire of company for the holiday when the doctor detained his wife and new-born child at the hospital. He was unable to address his frustration through having sex with a prostitute, and thus experienced further frustration that fed his anger further. Sam attributed his negative mood to the actions of the doctor, and wanted to avenge what he considered his loss. Thus, when he found the doctor’s car, he set fire to it to extract revenge, as well as to address his negative emotions. Conclusion There are a number of factors that act as antecedents to arson, and different reasons cause the individual to have different motivations to set fires while revenge and excitement are high among these reason people also set fires for reasons of material profit and to cover up other crimes. Some individuals seem to experience a particular thrill in setting fires, and are fascinated with the fire itself and describe it as a significant event in their lives when they watch a fire. For this reason, most arsonists return to the scene of the fire to watch its effects (Siegal. 2012; Davis & Lauber, 1999). In the present case, Sam seemed to me motivated by revenge, but his case history suggests that he would fit the profile of a pyromaniac or may be typified as a multi-fire setter. But it may be noted that with both inductive and deductive typologies, it seems to be difficult to create exclusive categories, and many arsonists seem to show signs of fitting more than just one typology as a time. Based on this literature and its analysis, Sam seems to use fire as a cathartic medium to work through negative feelings, as well as a means to exact revenge. His fascination with fire is longstanding, and thus, he could possibly be helped though the use of psycho-social interventions rather than just incarceration. References Borgeson, K. & Kuehnle, K. (2010). Serial Offenders: Theory and Practice. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Davis, J. A. & Lauber, K. M. (1999). Criminal Behavioral Assessment of Arsonists, Pyromaniacs, and Multiple Firesetters: The Burning Question, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 15(3), 273-290. Day, D. M. (2005). Applying Social Psychology to the Criminal Justice System. In Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A. & Coutts, L. M. (Ed.s). Applied Social Psychology: Understandign ad addressing social and practical problems. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Pp. 257 – 282. Dickens, G. & Sugarman, P. (2012). Differentiating firesetters: lessons from the literature on motivation and dangerousness. In Dickens, G. L., Sugarman, P. A. & Gannon T. A. (Ed.s). Firesetting and Mental Health: Theory, Research and Practice, London: RCPsych Publications. Pp. 48 – 67. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (2009). Uniform Crime Report: Crime in the United States, 2009. Online at www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_29.html Fritzon, K. (2012). Theories on Arson: the action systems model. In Dickens, G. L., Sugarman, P. A. & Gannon T. A. (Ed.s). Firesetting and Mental Health: Theory, Research and Practice, London: RCPsych Publications. Pp. 28 – 47. Kocsis, R. N. Irwin, H. J. & Hayes A. F. (1998). Organised and disorganised criminal behaviour syndromes in arsonists: A validation study of a psychological profiling concept. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 5(1), 117-131. Lowenstein L. F. (2003). Recent Research into Arson (1992-2000): Incidence, Causes and Associated Features, Predictions, Comparative Studies and Prevention and Treatment. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 10(1), 192-198. Siegel, L. J. (2012). Property Crime. In Criminology (11th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth, Cengage learning. Read More